Pac-12 Networks: Assessing the 2012 football schedule and distribution matters

Before we get to the meat, a few side notes of significance (the football schedule can be found here) …

*** On a teleconference Thursday, Pac-12 Enterprises CEO Gary Stevenson confirmed what we’ve suspected: Within the league’s geographic footprint, the Pac-12 regional networks will be on basic cable or digital basic. Outside the footprint, the Pac-12 national network will likely be shown on tiers.

*** Channel assignments will be announced on or around Aug. 1.

*** Nothing new on negotiations with DirecTV and Dish (and others). But here’s a valuable link to the Pac-12 Network channel locator, which gives you a direct avenue to the satellite companies (and others).

(Those following the situation closely may be heartened to see several Pac12Net matchups, notably San Diego State-Washington, Fresno State-Oregon, Oklahoma State-Arizona, Houston-UCLA and Cal-USC, that could provide some leverage in negotiations.)

*** Very important to remember: If you are an authenticated subscriber to one of the league’s cable/internet partners, you can get Pac12Net games on any device anywhere (once you log in).

*** Now, a word (or many words) about distribution …

With the Pac-12 as with everything, we call it like we see it here on the Hotline.

The $3 billion deal with ESPN and Fox?

Grand slam.

The formation of the Pac-12 Networks, with four founding cable partners?

Also a grand slam.

The 2012 football schedule on the Pac-12 Network(s)?

It’s a home run, but I’m not sure about a grand slam.

Ultimately, the satisfaction level of every fan depends on expectations and interpretation.

My expectations were framed last summer, when commissioner Larry Scott announced the formation of the national network and six regional networks and said:

Maybe I misread him … Or maybe Scott was speaking from a TV Everywhere point of view … But I interpreted his comment to mean that Pac-12 fans across the country (assuming they subscribed to one of the league’s cable/satellite partners) could plop down on the couch, flip on the big screen and watch every game live.

Turns out, that may not … I repeat: may not … be the case.

(Stay with me here. Like so much about the Pac12Net, the situation is confusing and, at this point, lacks many definitive answers.)

As many fans no doubt realized upon seeing the Pac12Net broadcast schedule for the first few weeks of the season, there are several instances in which more than one game kicks off at the same time.

That situation doesn’t exactly mesh with the founding principle of every game being available to everyone.

Consider the situation in Week 1, in which Nevada-Cal and Nicholls State-Oregon State both start at noon on the Pac12Net.

If you’re a Cal fan living in Portland — where the Pac-12/Oregon regional network will undoubtedly be showing the OSU game — you may not be able to plop on the couch, flip on the big screen and watch your Bears live.

Another example:

If you’re an Arizona fan living in San Francisco and watching on the Pac-12/Northern California regional network, then you have two potential conflicts: The Oklahoma State game in Week 2 is up against Duke-Stanford, and the South Carolina State game in Week 3 is up against Houston-UCLA (which you’d think would be preferred on the national and NoCal networks).

Reading that, you might think: Yikes! This Pac12Net setup isn’t even a solo home run, much less a grand slam.

But it’s important — no, it’s critical — to realize a few things:

1) Every football and men’s basketball game will be available live on your computer or mobile device so long as you subscribe to one of the league’s distribution partners. The league has taken a long-term approach to distribution (i.e., TV Everywhere).

2) Some cable/satellite companies, inside or outside the footprint, may carry more than one feed. For example: In Portland, Comcast could show not only the Oregon regional network on basic but also Pac-12 National on a sports tier, thus giving fans access to two games at the same time. (Stevenson said the cable companies are “sorting through” that option.)

3) With the right equipment and a little know-how, your TV can be hooked up to your computer, thus making your big screen and your computer screen one in the same … and as noted in 1), all the games are available online to authenticated subscribers. Again: TV Everywhere.

4) As I have written previously, it’s possible that an overflow channel will be made available in certain regions so that multiple games will be available at the same time. But that’s up to the distributors, not the conference.

5) The number of conflicts represents a small percentage of the total number of games and is presumably limited to the first few Saturdays, when there are 10-12 games per week. (Expect some conflicts for men’s basketball, as well.)

Again, it’s confusing, the conference doesn’t have all the answers, I sure as heck don’t have all the answers and, even now, two months before the Pac12Net launch, it’s a highly fluid situation.

It may seem less than ideal to fans — less than the grand slam Pac-12 fans have become accustomed to seeing Scott and Co. deliver.

But the presence of items 1-5 above elevates the Pac12Net broadcast model to a 2- or 3-run shot.

Jon Wilner

Post navigation

Alchemist, you can fling around insults all you want, but Scott’s performance on expansion was not “masterful.” He made the conference look like a chump by getting publicly rejected; then he created a situation where we wound up with a school — Utah — that major conference except, apparently, us was interested in.

Yes, expansion was necessary for a conference championship game. And thank God we got it — how did we ever live before we scintillating post-season matchups like Oregon-UCLA? (Yes, yes, you’re right, it could have been worse; UCLA could have won, knocking Oregon out of a BCS game, which would have been an excellent achievement for the Pac-12.)

But otherwise, it was a bust. It plunged the conference into acrimony over divisions and scheduling, messed up the conference’s rivalry game arrangements, and resulted in the admission of a new member promising to be the most whiny and self-entitled in conference history: Colorado, which within 10 minutes of joining was asserting its absolute right to play in the same division as USC.

Major TV markets? Denver, at No. 18, is only the fourth-biggest in the conference and probably decreased the average viewer-per-conference market numbers. Salt Lake City, at No. 33, would be NO ONE’s idea of a major market even if the University of Utah was its big dog, which it isn’t, as any BYU fan can explain to you.

There is NO EVIDENCE WHATSOEVER that the addition of these two school was necessary for us to swing the new TV contract. In fact, as Wilner has written over and over, they may even have worsened the TV payout for the legacy conference members. Whatever extra money they brought in has to be measured against the fact that the pot is now split 12 ways instead of 10. (Need help with that? Tell me and I’ll try to explain in numbers of one syllable.)

Likewise, this TV deal — even if, in the long run, some of these kinks get worked out — has hardly been masterful. Whether Scott ever said in so many words that every football and basketball game would appear on the Pac-12 Network live, and that everybody would be able to get the games on the Internet, he could not help but have known it was being reported that way. A “masterful” commissioner would have corrected the misimpressions immediately. He didn’t. Instead, he let fans believe for months in something that was not the truth. Reasonable people can disagree whether he’s a liar or just an incompetent, but the anger on this blog and others would not be present if he were “masterful.”

You can keep on bragging that this deal is a lot better than the one the Big 10 had a few years ago. But most of us don’t care because we’re not Big 10 fans or Big 10 Network subscribers. We care about whether this contract is better than what WE had a year ago. Except for the money — which was inevitably going to be hugely increased because the TV market has changed so much since the last deal was signed — it isn’t, at least so far. And “so far” is all we have to judge on. Whether Pac-12 games will really be available in every home in Beijing two decades from now is a matter for people who like to eat their pie in the sky.

Calfan

Denver and Salt Lake City were good gets. Denver was in the Pac’s sights all along. As for Utah, if we hadn’t gotten them, they’be part of the Big12 by now. Whether they were the big dog in their own state or not didn’t matter because the other dog came with too many fleas. However, the main target all along was Texas. And, we failed to get them although Scott came very close – closer than anyone would have thought.

Where the conference, not just Scott, failed was in not recognizing that OU also was a big dog we could have had. For that, a large part of the blame has to go to Colorado, which came in as a whiny female dog. CU’s chancellor speceficially stated it didn’t want OU as the anchor for the East. Following CU was a bad move, Pac 12. Because of it, the Pac12 network won’t make as much as it could have, and future expansion possibilities are very limited. In the arms race, the Pac is now virtually landlocked and, at 12 members with only five states on the fold, it lags behind the SEC and B10 in revenue and market size – which are the only numbers that matter. The SEC is at 14, with new markets and on the move, and the B10 won’t stay at 12 when (not if) ND jumps in – probably as soon as their NBC deal ends. Even the B12 has options to the East. What’ll be left for the Pac?

Overall though, the score for Scott is positive – thus far.

ccrider55

AZ, CA, CO, NV, OR, UT, WA = 6

Nobody is saying gaining UT wouldn’t have greatly increased the PACXX networks value. The positive was gaining UT. But the negative would be having UT and it’s Texas sized ego (would make some current members look mild in comparison). UT was working on getting into the B1G at the same time, but got turned down there too. Are we now going to bash Delaney? OU can’t go without OkSU, and it’s clear now they won’t go without UT. I agree that CU should have kept their mouth shut. It would have been much clearer that OU was playing leverage games and the PAC closed the door when they learned that.was the case.

Anyway, water under the bridge. B12 has lost four big members and picked up two refugees, one MWC and one BLeast. Hard to say they are anything but weaker. Even gaining FSU (highly unlikely) plus anyone not named ND would barely make it a net neutral. Geographic isolation is a protection as well as a limitation. Who could encroach? And we are the only viable alternative for the group (UT, OU, OkSU, ??) if the B12 ever actually did die.

ccrider55

Sorry, Calfan. Poor attempt at a joke-throwing an extra state in so your number of states would add up to six.

Tom McNamara

There seems to be real misunderstanding why Scott, with the conference backing, went after UT (and could do so again in the future).

1) One of the very few remaining powerhouse schools that has a significant alumni presence in the West Coast not in the conference already

2) Political representation. There’s a long list of Congressmen in Texas that are alums, and non-athletic partnerships with the University of California would have benefited both states and schools.

3) Austin has a high-tech economy. The same type of people who are thinking about moving to Austin to work also might be thinking about Silicon Valley instead, and vice versa.

Oklahoma offers none of these things, and eventually will be one of the last pieces in the SEC’s quest for 16. Texas will never accept being in the SEC (partially because of its “Western” identity) and the Big Ten will never accept Texas anyway….

Thus, the realignment outcome ended up being the optimal for the conference, even if it was not the blockbuster everyone anticipated.

Calfan

I’m not sure the Pac is as protected as it thinks. The Big East is encroaching west, even if it is “just” into the San Diego and Idaho markets. Plus BYU can be had, thereby challenging the Pac’s ownership of Utah. True the Pac doesn’t want any of those schools (BYU, San Diego State or Boise State), but then what other choices west of the Rockies does it have?

For the foreseable future, though, the Pac has no choice but to remain at 12 and watch as the other conferences get larger and reach more markets. Hopefully, the Pac hasn’t given up on the Texas market altogether (it’s not just UT), and Scott can make a move if/when it’s needed.

Jim Jones

First ofall it is not up to Larry Scott on whether we expand. That decision is made by the Presidentfs of the Universities and right now none of them want to expand beyond 12. If they get a consensusof at least 8 schools that they want to expand to certain acceptable schools then Larry will pursue the matter. The reason he backed off last September is none of the schools wanted to expand at the time and a few schools were really against it particularly Utah, Colorado and the Arizona schools.

If they decide to expand their are several schools who may be acceptable academically inncluding Hawaii, New Mexico , Colorado State, UTEP, Houston and Rice.

Right nnow both the PaC 12 and Big 10 are happyy at 12.

alchemist

Harold:

I will make an effort to bring out a kinder, gentler alchemist for the duration of this post.

We were the only major conference interested in Utah because we were the only major conference looking at expanding at the time, and the Utes would have been a geographic outlier anywhere else. If anything it was convenient that the most attractive of the non-AQ schools was right in our back yard.

It also wasn’t Scott’s fault that the conference’s best team didn’t make sure everyone got their hush money and they ended up getting spanked by the NCAA so we got a lousy CCG out of it.

What acrimony was there over the divisional split? Maybe from some of the fans but the higher-ups who know more about this than we do appear to have all been on the same page. Rivalry games weren’t messed up; Cal and Stanford wanted special treatment and they threw a fit when they didn’t get it. If you think Colorado is the most whiny, self-entitled member of the conference then I strongly suggest you not ever attend a road game at the Coliseum. You’re just going to have to take my word for it on that. As to Colorado’s comments, they probably were told in advance that in the event of a Pac 12 with them and Utah that they would be placed in a South division with the LA schools, the Arizona schools and the Utes. When Scott made his expansion move in 2010 he presented the target members with some well-researched and detailed revenue projections. If you’re making revenue projections based off your inventory of game you need to know what that inventory is so before any invitations were issued there probably was some agreement amongst the Pac 10 CEOs about what a 12 team conference would look like. Likewise if Colorado is going to bail on the Big 12 they would have been remiss if they didn’t know what their place in the new conference would be. So either someone at Colorado let the cat out of the bag on an issue that had already been decided, or the CEOs (a very conservative bunch) decided to throw caution to the wind and just assume that everything would just work itself out when it came time to get down to the nuts and bolts of it. To me, common sense dictates it’s the former.

As to the size of the per team payouts, Wilner was on ATQ last night and he said there that the best numbers he’s seen says the per-team payout to the legacy members of the Pac 12 is about $1 million per year higher as a result of expansion. Obviously that could grow a bit depending on the success of the P12N but as of a couple hours ago that’s what Wilner was reporting. Given the options, so long as we’re able to avoiding sliding back into being a “sort of loosely wound configuration of sometimes like-minded universities” I’ll take an extra million bucks.

If we want to parse Scott’s words when discussing the network then “exposure” was always mentioned as one of, if not the main priority for the network. How does one get exposure? If you do an internet-based broadband delivery then it’s difficult to grow beyond your hardcore fan base because people have to plunk their money down to you specifically to be able to see the content you’re providing. But if you do group sales to millions of people at a time through their cable or satellite company then you have a chance to catch casual fans that are channel surfing, and that is where the increase in exposure for all our sports comes from. Scott was true to his word on what was stated up-front to be one of, if not his highest priority.

This contract blows the old one out of the water for the 40 million homes served by the conference’s current cable partners. When the DirecTV deal gets done, probably in late August (Wilner speculated on this with ATQ last night as well), it becomes a better deal for 60 million homes and we go from there.

Lest you think I’m singing Scott’s praises because I’m one of the 40 million safe households, I can tell you I’m not. None of our four current cable partners are available where I live so I’ve been on the phone and sent emails both directly and through the Pac 12 website and if this fight goes down to the wire and no deal is done, or a deal gets done with one of the locals or the satcoms but I don’t have time to get my service switched them I’m out of luck for a while. I won’t like it but it’s worth it when I consider what we’re building.

alchemist

Calfan:

I seem to remember hearing NBC was going to bump ND up to the $20 million range with their new extension, plus they’ll get whatever pittance comes their way from the conference formerly known as the Big East for their basketball and other sports. I don’t think they’re ready to take the plunge on the B1G yet there’s another significant shakeup in the landscape.

Tom McNamara

Calfan:

Boise won’t be able to afford to stay in the Big East long. It only joined it because it was trying to be in AQ conference. Then wouldn’t you know mere days later, the BCS announces there will be no AQ conferences in the future. Coincidence?

The PAC 12 won’t expand without Texas. It’s that simple. No other school on it’s own is worth the time, money, or effort.

ccrider55

Calfan:

Seriously? You think the WAC division of the Big Least is a concern to the PAC?
I think you have security issues…

MostWanted

@68

That’s because you don’t know what sexy is.

Rise Spartans and take your rightful place at the head of the table.

Palo Alto is garbage compared to San Jose.

MostWanted

No the real problem is not so much the $$ as it is the 1 and done’s. For the past what 5 years, San Jose has had to go to Stanford to play the BWLG where they have the advantage of home field. San Jose needs “majors” to also visit Spartan Stadium, at least, in home and home. That’s my real reason for wanting San Jose in the PAC. I believe that having a PAC schedule will skyrocket attendance because of the sheer numbers of potential fans who would be interested in seeing the PAC schools in Spartan Stadium. No doubt the PAC schools are sexy, especially on the west coast but they’ve had the opportunity. Give San Jose the same opportunity and I guarantee more fans at SS than at Stanford and at least half of the other PAC schools. Palo Alto has what 50-60,000 people. Yeah, San Jose has over a million and a lot more alumni. It’s not just WHO and how much it’s also WHERE you play the game. Fan interest, in my opinion, would sky rocket to unbelievable levels if PAC schools visited SS more.

Cousin Maynard

Jon just posted the P12Ns FAQ, among other thing it addresses digital distribution:

if youre a sub to P12N thru one of the big 4 cable cos, youll have access to one to the online stuff, no matter where you are across our great land .

that is alot more than big ten ppl with comcast can say out here :

no BTN in HD, SD only
no BTN “app” or online access
no overflow games, just the national one, in gawd awful picture framed SD naturally

and before you directv guys start in with your anxieties, you guys have had the best of the best forever sports programming wise. hearing you guys complain you might not have P12N is like hearing Ray Ratto complain that his dessert might come late.

Cousin Maynard

LMAO@ the shorthorn network (TSN?) going after a texas tech in state cupcake game, and getting denied!

yeah, espn wouldve been getting all that 15 mil back with that game!

the good news is, no football games = more potential for a jerry springer show hosted by mac brown featuring UT fans gone wild.

MostWanted

That’s kind of what I was alluding to before, how much is San Jose getting for the BWLG game from P12net and how much is Stanford getting? I guess I don’t need to know but it would be nice. I don’t see Stanford on the schedule after this year so if we did know and there were plans to continue the game at some future date then, at least we could get an idea of how much to charge for the content or they could get Idaho and have an empty stadium.

ccrider55

MostWanted:

Huh? ESPN trying to get TT vs UTSA on LHN in order to get subscribers into double digits equates how? (TT threatened to cancel game, play 11 this year rather than be on the LHN)

SJSU is getting nothing directly from media rights the school they are visiting own. They may be getting a negotiated appearence fee. Ask the SJSU athletic dept. They are also gaining visibility and exposure on a network they had nothing to do with creating.

Idaho would visit, but the Kibbie dome would be packed for a visit by a PAC school.

Jim Jones

When SJSU visits a PAC12 school if they are so lucky they are entitled to whatever amount the host agrees to pay them, but not one pennyof the PaC 12 Network money. If a PAC 12 school goes to San JOse that is a different matter but I do not see anybody but maybe Stanford or cal doing that. SJSU football is not even a good mid major program. I know this is a San Jose newspaper site but SJSU football not very high up on food chain

Dan

There are a total of 8 conflicts all season, but when it’s your team not being shown nationally, you’re understandably not happy. By my count, there are a total of four games which would need to be shown on an overflow channel. This shouldn’t be hard. Fans need to keep the pressure on the P12N and Comcast to show all the games live!

By the way, we wouldn’t have this problem at all if the Pac-12 hadn’t decided that all out-of-conference games (except those grandfathered in) will be held in the first three weeks of the season. Without the rule, the P12N could get their games onto a national tier.

ccrider55

Dan:

“By the way, we wouldn’t have this problem at all if the Pac-12 hadn’t decided that all out-of-conference games (except those grandfathered in) will be held in the first three weeks of the season. Without the rule, the P12N could get their games onto a national tier.”

Did someone at Comcast, cox, etc. tell you this nugget? OSU/Nicholls St, Cal/S Utah, AZ/Toledo, etc. played mid season is the trick to getting nationwide basic carriage? Who knew?

alchemist

ccrider55:

I think he’s referring to the doubled-up coverage. If Cal’s game at Oregon State was Week 1 then that could get national clearance on the P12N in the time slot the Bears and Beavers share now and if the games against Nevada and Nicholls State were to take place in whatever week the two are currently supposed to play each other then there would be seven games Pac 12 home games that week instead of the standard six and it would be easier to get everything on national television.

I hadn’t heard about Texas Tech threatening to cancel a game rather than allowing it to be played on the LHN but if that’s true then it’s awesome. Tech is the one school Big 12 school I feel really bad for because more than anyone it was them who had their golden ticket stolen by forces beyond their control. If they want to continue collectively flipping the bird in the general direction of Austin then no one ought to blame them for it.

I know why we didn’t take Texas Tech either last year or the year before it and I applaud that as a smart business decision and I know the academic arguments but if there was ever anyone who deserved an escape it’s them and a part of me really wishes we were able to give it to them.

MostWanted

Jim Jones

..and yet San Jose still exists. Not only do they exist but even Phil Steeles predicts San Jose one of the most improved programs for 2012 which means higher SOS. San Jose has survived the onslaught and moved into the Mountain West where we’ll have better competiton against well known brands. As it is the San Jose schedule is ranked around 43rd toughest in the Nation which is a big improvement over #1 toughest in the Nation. With President Q supporting football and Boise’s ex AD heading the Athletic Department and Coach Mac in place all the pieces are inplace to make a run to higher rankings. Here come the Spartans, get ready. And yes this is a San Jose News outlet, recognize.